Article Tools

The Board of Supervisors will meet on Tuesday, February 21 to discuss and vote on the Eastern Goleta Valley Community Plan, which has not been updated for 19 years.

It has been a long and contentious battle for the residents of the Valley trying to retain the quality of our semi-rural and suburban community, which values agricultural land, horse and bike trails, open space and careful, modest growth. The community has been criticized for valuing these things while developers, housing advocates, and planners have pushed forward with their agenda, with little regard for the vast majority of citizens who have invested their lives here. Wherever there was land, the push has been to “infill” it with cement, people, and cars.

Barbara Kloos

By building three- and four-story cement cities along Hollister and Calle Real, the belief is that everyone will suddenly change their California lifestyle, and feel compelled to hop on a bus or bike to downtown Santa Barbara, while gas emissions vanish with the wind. It’s no wonder that the community has not been very excited about the Plan.

Despite the continual obstacles thrown in our path, a number of us in the community have hung in during this chaotic process, to try and influence the outcome of development here over the next 20 years. In the end, the community will give up 30 acres for high density housing, including some land zoned for agriculture. The Plan opens the door to pack approximately 650 high-density new dwelling units into less than a square mile, right in the center of the region that already has the largest amount of affordable housing per capita in the county.

It’s becoming apparent how absurd the NIMBY [“not in my back yard”] label has become in light of what’s really going on. This is a phony term the special-interest housing groups have tried to brand us with because we actually have normal sensibilities about the community that 36,000 people call home. I guess the NIMBY-phobes think responsible residents should abdicate their common sense, and turn over their community to developers.

Just when all seemed fairly calm, and the Community Plan was making its way to the Supervisors, an outside agency, the California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. (CRLA) mysteriously got involved. Their normal mission is to strive for economic justice and human rights on behalf of California’s rural poor. This group showed no visible interest during the months-long public process of the Community Plan’s development. Then, suddenly, they took an unusually intense interest in two large sites proposed for rezoning.

One wonders what a few acres in the middle of a residential community have to do with the “rural poor” charter of the CRLA? The CRLA soon felt “compelled” to contact the State Housing authorities in Sacramento to tattle on the County over how land-use was being calculated. Again, not exactly the specialty of the CRLA in a place like the Eastern Goleta Valley (EGV). Curiously, this is the exact same scenario that took place last July when Montecito developer Michael Towbes went behind the back of our county officials by directly contacting the state. He attempted to alter the direction of the Planning Commission after he learned that a property of interest to him (San Marcos Growers) was not being considered for development. Were it not for a strong outcry from the community, we may have been forced into converting even more large parcels of agricultural land into mass apartment buildings. (The correspondence referred to above is public information.)

Apparently, the way the county officials calculated density, which is completely legal, did not yield the tenement-like feel that Towbes, the CRLA, and others seek, even though a stunning 650 new units are being proposed. Their goal is to add even more acreage, density, and cement to the Eastern Goleta Valley. Can these forces ever really be satisfied? Just look around California for your answer. Needless to say, it is of the utmost offense to the residents of the EGV, when outsiders try to dictate development and override the good sense of the people who actually live here.

The CRLA’s letter started out as if the group were genuinely concerned about adding more housing to the two large sites. But a few paragraphs into their letter, its real motive for getting involved surfaced: “It is apparent that the County is making every effort to avoid rezoning excellent sites ….” The “excellent site” they are referring to is San Marcos Growers (next to Vons), one of the last large open spaces in the heart of the Valley that would be a huge financial windfall for Towbes if developed. Wow, in another amazing coincidence, the CRLA is now in the business of recommending particular building sites on behalf of developers. Clearly, Towbes and the CRLA are trying to circumvent the very Community Plan that has taken years and thousands of community volunteer hours to develop.

Does it even occur to these few special interest entities that perhaps the Planning Commission and the County really did consider what the impact of developing San Marcos Growers would be, and that they concluded that it would not be a good benefit to the community? Maybe they actually did listen to the neighbors and residents of the valley as they weighed in on the pros and cons (all cons) of developing this site. Bottom line: Those who live here are quite certain that trading prime, active agricultural land in the center of our valley for apartment buildings diminishes the entire region, while only serving the self-interest of a few.

Can Towbes and the Hodges family (owners of San Marcos Growers) graciously bow out and respect the obvious wishes of an entire community? (Consider the generosity of the Girsch family, who built an enormous sports complex to enrich the City of Goleta.) Can [the Hodges] be content with their successful ag business and let the vast majority of the long-term EGV residents be the ones who shape the future here?

It should be noted that this entire episode is very similar to the recent Bishop Ranch situation, in which the Goleta citizens and Council members soundly rejected large-scale, outside development. EGV residents are of exactly the same mind.

We have been fed the “affordable housing” rhetoric for years. The most recent “affordable” development in our valley, Sumida Gardens, started out to be 100% affordable units, then 50%, but finally yielded only 3% of the units for low income renters and 14% for moderate income renters. That means that 83% of the units are at – cha-ching – market rate!!! Additionally, the developer, Mr. Towbes, was given $10 million of our tax money to build these few affordable units. It’s time to take a hard look at the misleading model of building large quantities of housing in order to net a few affordable units, as well as all the pro-development, anti-community propaganda that goes with it.

On Tuesday, the County received a letter from the State in response to the CRLA letter. The State seems to be waffling on its prior approval of the way densities area calculated. This leaves the community wondering how the County will respond. Will the Community Plan go forward as the commissioners recommended, or will there be last-minute changes without community input? With less than a week left before the County Supervisors see the plan, and with the public process winding down, this is clearly not a prudent way to lay the foundation for the next 20 years of growth.

This process has left a lot of people disillusioned at the absence of “community” in the “Community Plan.” We can’t find ourselves anywhere in it! LOTS of dense housing with no parks, no public amenities, no improvements, no beautification projects, and of course, the status quo on the traffic medians that we’ve come to know and love as “Round-Up Landscaping.” Over the last 20 years, in the area around San Marcos High School, the County has planted one median with the cheapest offering of plants imaginable. Yet there always seems to be such zeal to over-develop our communities with more compact apartments, new traffic signals, increased gridlock, and the many other glories of urbanization.

It’s not quite the end of the road, as the Supervisors’ vote is still on the horizon, perhaps to come in as early as next Tuesday. There’s just the sobering and disheartening awareness that the real people, the taxpayers, the voters, the residents of our lovely communities and neighborhoods that make Santa Barbara a great place, don’t have the primary voice they should in determining the outcome of their own community. We’re now subject to the votes of the five County Supervisors to shape the Eastern Goleta Valley for the coming decades. Will it be undesirable, “smart growth” urbanization, or a continuation of the open, semi-rural feel that characterizes our valley?

We’re certainly looking to our supervisor, Janet Wolf, to protect our neighborhoods, deliver a good ending to this long, grueling process, and to be a strong voice to the other supervisors on behalf of the majority of the Eastern Goleta Valley residents.

Comments

Our agricultural lands are if not the, one of the most important and precious (and naturally renewing) resources we have in SB County. Close proximity to food sources helps keep prices down for example. The more independent a community is, the stronger it is.We should not only be protecting these spaces but encouraging ALL grocery stores and restaurants to be purchasing their supplies from our local farmers as much as possible.In short, growing up means we don't have to pave over our backyard garden.

What a great article. I've lived in the Goleta Valley since 1970 and every time I see farmland or any open space being paved over I cringe. We are losing our heritage, open space - the very heart of Goleta - and replacing it with pollution and pavement.

Led by Janet Wolf and her amazing leadership, the Board of Supervisors should reject developers' desires to pave over our fertile and fair valley.

The proposed Goleta Community Plan includes 650 new housing units! This is too much development - more than our community and infrastructure and services can support.

*Save the South Paterson Agricultural Lands. *Do not rezone the Caird property - an organic farm abutting two sensitive creeks.*Hands off the San Marcos farms parcel.*Save the farm stand on Hollister!

These lands help make Goleta special. If replaced by housing, a big part of Goleta and a little part of me would surely die.

Speaking of affordable housing, the FHA is now offering mortgage insurance on up to $729,000 with only 3.5% down. Meanwhile, the organization is nearly insolvent and will need a huge bailout this year. Without this major federal government subsidy of the high-end real estate market, many of the houses in Santa Barbara would quickly become affordable to an average working family and there would be no economic incentive for development companies to pave over the farms with high density condos.Meanwhile, the poor cities of the country are bulldozing vacant houses and the former residents are riding buses to the coast to live on the street. The reason the federal government is choosing to prop up expensive real estate is because it is keeping the banks from collapsing. It is a gigantic bailout for the banks. Consider that a "home-owner" pays 1.5 to 2 times the monthly rate of a renter. However, in California, the mortgage is a trust deed and a note, so the "home-owner" is really not the owner. The bank is the owner of the house, and of the politicians. Democracy is on loan from the bank.Wake up people. If you are paying more for your mortgage than you would to rent the same house, and if you have no equity, or negative equity in the house, learn about strategic default. The federal laws governing mortgage default are likely to change following the 2012 election. Default while you still can or risk being a slave to debt for the rest of your life.

Let those big banks collapse. It's their own fault. How many businesses in our area could've used a bailout because of the circumstances brought on by Wall St. but instead went under while the corporate hegemony was strengthened.Speaking as a layperson, native2sb's comments make sense to me.

To put it in simple terms. Take an ACRE of land and add two rabbits - Paradise. Now when the rabbits reproduce to the point that the ACRE no longer sustains the population they start to starve, get sick and have a large die off. It is funny that population sustainability has become Political. The Right wants to develop for Profit and the Left wants to develop for Social Justice. Both views forget to take in account basic High School Biology and Natural Law that was so prominent during Malthus's life.

Barbara: you have written a fantastic article, but you also seem surprised by some of the behavior of these people/groups in California. Everyone needs to know that there is a HUGE racket going on for the past 40 yrs between unions, developers and Sacramento low-income-housing bureaucrats. They combine, under the law, to build housing low income residents (justification), employ union workers (favors) and make developers rich (influence). There is ZERO evidence that these programs are effective for the working poor - none - but Californians overwhelmingly vote liberal/democrat and feed this cycle.

@howgreenwasmyvalley: The left used to champion the cause of family planning when it was directed toward American couples. Now that that the rapid increase in the U.S. population is through immigration and the higher birth rates of immigrants the left won't touch it with a ten-foot-pole even though they tacitly support Planned Parenthood.

High density is never a good thing. I've lived in Goleta my whole life and it's changed a tremendous amount. I remember orchards where Five Points Shopping Center now resides. We do however, need some balance and homes for those who can't afford to live and work in their communities. As for Janets' leadership.......Poor, Weak, Fiscally irresponsible, Ethically Challenged, Micro Manager of Department Heads is a lot more accurate than the term used by Goleta 43. The thought of using the "O" word to describe how she is willing to let Goleta Beach wash away, support crony Administrators and financially ruin this County (Fact by the Way), makes me physically ill.

I've been here since 1961, and Five Points, home to my beloved Koelsch's Bakery, has been there since then (and probably before). I remember sitting in the car in the parking lot there, listening to KIST with my Mom as we went to pick up some groceries at Jordano's, the day they announced Nat King Cole's death ('65).

@billclausen: Amazing that both current Political opposites lead to Cultural Suicide.

NatGeo had a repeat of 'America before Columbus" on last night.

In the 1490's the Anasazi had to abandon their great settlement because of a slight weather change and over use of the environment.

Nothing New here.

Water, historically, has been the Big Driver of civilization.

The current water delivery in California is maxed its not political but fact. Does not matter how you like your politics.

Human arrogance be what it may, Natural Law always wins.

It is too bad Humans do not base their Politics around what is doable under the constraints of Natural Law, we did once.

We can mutate Nature only so much with Petrol Chemicals to increase crop yields and the redirection of water from its Natural State, at what price, but in the end Nature will win.

My Father was born 8 years after the Inyo River Valley was destroyed, 3 years before the Hetch Hetchy Valley was destroyed, 11 years before the North/South canal, 21 years before the Hoover Dam destroyed the Gulf of California. I would say it took until 1990 for the true permanent destruction of these Water Projects to hit home.

Now we are over populated, have homes in Victorville, Palmdale/ Lancaster that require the equivalent on 60" of rainfall per year to have a green lawn. 5 million in the Phoenix Metro, 3 million in Las Vegas Metro, before 2008, and our Politicos still don't get it.

When the City of Los Angeles is looking at mixing reclaimed Sewer Water into Drinking Water, you would think the light would come on.

The California Water Projects are in need of Billions of Dollars of Maintenance, Repair, Replacement and nothing is being done.

The Malthusian theory is laughed at by some because we aren't running out of food (yet) but your point is correct in the fact that there are simply too many people and this issue is being ignored because short-term interests on both sides of the political aisle are served by the Ponzi Scheme of cramming more and more people into a finite space.

One thing to think about would be the possibility of harvesting well water per our drinking/washing usage. Costs might make it impractical, but it's worth thinking about.

To all those who think there are, "too many people" - remember, change starts from within, and those very people who think there are too many people can vacate to more rural regions across the country.

We have economic inertia here where commercial support is barely being sustained. Kids drive all the way from Ventura and Oxnard just to work at places like Best Buy in Goleta.

Meanwhile, tax entities such as the UCSB hit up the County for more funds just to keep their business model rolling.

There's plenty of open space all over to provide agriculture that isn't next door to the hospital, the theatre, the supermarket.

This level of interference is definitely transparent to the NIMBY enthusiasts that they want their cake and eat it, too.

Answer me this - from where will the WATER come from for all this development - or do you think the LAKE has an endless supply. I already hear the (D word) Draught being used, looking at the Sierra snow pack.

Carpetbaggers always want their cake and eat it, too.

But the realty is not one Dam has been built in California in 40 years, the North/South canal is 79 years old etc. etc. The Sacramento Levy System has areas over 100 years old.

These are Facts not Politics.

Show me the Water.

Developers in Phoenix must show a 100 year water supply for each project, a good idea.

How ironic...we're talking about lack of water while the Malthusian* scenario mentioned by Adonis_Tate might be the reason for the ocean level rising to the point where someday much of the area in question will be covered in water.